WEBVTT 00:00:01.000 --> 00:00:07.800 Every story and every written text has certain logic, they are all constructed according to certain principles. 00:00:08.000 --> 00:00:13.000 Essentially, basic underlying structure is the same, or at least similar, to all writing. 00:00:13.200 --> 00:00:18.000 Same logic applies to a story, academic book, or an article. 00:00:18.900 --> 00:00:26.000 Of course, these different forms of writing differ in many ways as well, in terms of length, complexity, depth. 00:00:26.200 --> 00:00:30.000 Still, we can identify some basic logic or principles. 00:00:30.200 --> 00:00:33.000 So, what does every text need to have? 00:00:33.200 --> 00:00:38.000 A text typically needs to have an INTRODUCTION, MAIN BODY AND CONCLUSION. 00:00:39.000 --> 00:00:45.900 IN THE INTRODUCTION you should say what you are writing about, that is what is your topic, claim or argument. 00:00:46.000 --> 00:00:51.000 IN THE MAIN BODY you should present the arguments that back up your thesis or claim. 00:00:51.200 --> 00:00:55.000 In principle, you should put separate arguments as separate paragraphs. 00:00:55.200 --> 00:01:00.588 Generally speaking, the ratio between these elements should be: 10% for the 00:01:00.612 --> 00:01:06.000 introduction,10% for the conclusion and 80% for the main body of your text. 00:01:06.200 --> 00:01:11.000 Of course, these percentages are not set in stone, but you should aim to follow this in general. 00:01:12.800 --> 00:01:19.000 Great Irish writer James Joyce once said that the art of writing consists of writing sentences. 00:01:19.200 --> 00:01:24.000 One could paraphrase this and say that the secret of good writing is to write good paragraphs. 00:01:25.500 --> 00:01:29.985 Think about a paragraph as a separate unit of text, as a separate little 00:01:30.009 --> 00:01:35.000 world - at the beginning announce its content or basic question or questions. 00:01:35.200 --> 00:01:40.000 Each sentence that follows should add something or contain some new information. 00:01:40.500 --> 00:01:48.000 The direction of presenting should be - from familiar to unfamiliar, from known to unknown, from old to new. 00:01:48.500 --> 00:01:52.000 End your paragraph with a simple conclusion. 00:01:52.700 --> 00:01:56.338 Sentences should thus be connected in a logical order and your 00:01:56.362 --> 00:02:00.000 paragraph should have a clear flow of ideas and information. 00:02:00.500 --> 00:02:04.508 Compare these two paragraphs - even though both contain pretty much the 00:02:04.532 --> 00:02:09.000 same information, it is perfectly clear that the second one is far superior. 00:02:09.200 --> 00:02:11.000 Why? 00:02:11.100 --> 00:02:16.938 While sentences in the first paragraph are somehow mechanical and unrelated, in the second one 00:02:16.962 --> 00:02:22.800 you can see the flow from one thought to another, and you can easily follow the logical order. 00:02:23.500 --> 00:02:27.738 You have an opening sentences that describes the topic of the paragraph, 00:02:27.762 --> 00:02:32.000 and everything that is said there somewhat contributed to the main topic. 00:02:32.800 --> 00:02:39.000 So, this would be one way to correct the things that are missing to make the first paragraph look better. 00:02:39.200 --> 00:02:44.000 Let us now move to the question - what can we achieve with our writing? 00:02:44.500 --> 00:02:48.450 Of course, writing can do many things, but in this context I would simply 00:02:48.460 --> 00:02:52.000 distinguish three things that are worth having in mind: 00:02:52.200 --> 00:02:56.000 We can precisely express our ideas in our writing. 00:02:56.100 --> 00:02:58.000 We can complicate simple ideas. 00:02:58.200 --> 00:03:01.000 Or we can complicate already complex ideas. 00:03:01.200 --> 00:03:04.000 Of course, only option 1 means good writing. 00:03:05.300 --> 00:03:09.669 I will now offer few illustrations of these principles from a great book 00:03:09.693 --> 00:03:14.000 called Style: Towards Clarity and Grace, written by Joseph Williams. 00:03:15.100 --> 00:03:22.000 Let's take an example of the first case, that is, of precisely expressing very complex and complicated ideas. 00:03:22.500 --> 00:03:28.638 The example is taken from the book called Philosophy as Logical Syntax, written by a Rudolf 00:03:28.662 --> 00:03:34.800 Carnap in 1935, Carnap was a philosopher who belonged to a school called logical positivism. 00:03:35.200 --> 00:03:41.000 They believed that even the most difficult problems could be logically examined and expressed. 00:03:42.200 --> 00:03:48.000 The problems of philosophy as usually dealt with are of very different kinds. 00:03:48.800 --> 00:03:53.050 From the point of view which I am here taking we may distinguish 00:03:53.074 --> 00:03:58.000 mainly three kinds of problems and doctrines in traditional philosophy. 00:03:59.200 --> 00:04:07.000 For the sake of simplicity we shall call these parts Metaphysics, Psychology, and Logic. 00:04:08.200 --> 00:04:15.088 Or, rather, there are not three distinct regions, but three sorts of components which in most 00:04:15.112 --> 00:04:22.000 theses and questions are combined: a metaphysical, a psychological, and a logical component. 00:04:22.200 --> 00:04:30.000 The considerations that follow belong to the third region: we are here carrying out Logical Analysis. 00:04:31.100 --> 00:04:38.110 The function of logical analysis is to analyse all knowledge, all assertions of science and of everyday 00:04:38.134 --> 00:04:44.800 life, in order to make clear the sense of each such assertion and the connections between them. 00:04:45.000 --> 00:04:50.243 One of the principal tasks of the logical analysis of a given proposition 00:04:50.267 --> 00:04:55.000 is to find out the method of verification for that proposition. 00:04:55.500 --> 00:05:01.592 The question is: What reasons can there be to assert this proposition; 00:05:01.616 --> 00:05:07.000 or: How can we become certain as to its truth or falsehood? 00:05:08.500 --> 00:05:13.663 This question is called by the philosophers the epistemological question; 00:05:13.687 --> 00:05:18.346 epistemology or the philosophical theory of knowledge is nothing 00:05:18.370 --> 00:05:22.916 other than a special part of logical analysis, usually combined 00:05:22.940 --> 00:05:28.000 with some psychological questions concerning the process of knowing. 00:05:28.500 --> 00:05:32.901 Thus, as this illustration shows, it is possible to express even the most 00:05:32.925 --> 00:05:38.000 complex ideas in the logical form that can be read and understood by most people. 00:05:39.800 --> 00:05:45.478 Let us now move to our second example of how to make simple things complicated - In the foreword 00:05:45.502 --> 00:05:51.000 to Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language, the authors say the following: 00:05:51.500 --> 00:05:58.408 The absence from this dictionary of a handful of old, well-known vulgate terms for sexual and excretory 00:05:58.432 --> 00:06:05.000 organs and functions is not due to a lack of citations for these words from current literature. 00:06:05.200 --> 00:06:10.623 On the contrary, the profusion of such citations in recent years would suggest 00:06:10.647 --> 00:06:16.000 that the terms in question are so well known as to require no explanation. 00:06:16.200 --> 00:06:23.632 The decision to eliminate them as part of the extensive culling process that is the inevitable task 00:06:23.656 --> 00:06:31.088 of the lexicographer was made on the practical grounds that there is still objection in many quarters 00:06:31.112 --> 00:06:38.544 to the appearance of these terms in print and that to risk keeping this dictionary out of the hands 00:06:38.568 --> 00:06:46.000 of some students by introducing several terms that require little if any elucidation would be unwise. 00:06:46.500 --> 00:06:54.000 What this effectively means is: We excluded vulgar words for sex and excretion, not because we could not find them. 00:06:54.200 --> 00:06:58.000 We excluded them because many people object to seeing them. 00:06:58.300 --> 00:07:03.331 Had we included them, some teachers and schoolboards would have refused to let this 00:07:03.355 --> 00:07:09.000 dictionary be used by their students, who in any event already know what those words mean. 00:07:09.500 --> 00:07:17.000 So, you can convey your message by using twice as less words and say it with clear and more understandable words. 00:07:17.300 --> 00:07:24.000 Finally, let us see the example of the third type, that is, how to complicate already complex ideas: 00:07:24.800 --> 00:07:28.948 Similarities may develop in the social organization of societies 00:07:28.972 --> 00:07:32.657 at similar levels of economic development because there 00:07:32.681 --> 00:07:36.659 are "imperatives" built into the socio-technical system they 00:07:36.683 --> 00:07:41.000 adopt which drive them to similar responses to common problems. 00:07:41.500 --> 00:07:47.238 This model, therefore, places great emphasis on the level of economic development 00:07:47.262 --> 00:07:53.000 of nations to account for movement towards common forms of social organization. 00:07:54.200 --> 00:07:58.588 Alternatively, convergence may result from simple borrowing, so 00:07:58.612 --> 00:08:03.000 that a model of the diffusion of innovation becomes appropriate. 00:08:03.700 --> 00:08:08.818 Where such borrowing occurs levels of development may be less relevant than 00:08:08.842 --> 00:08:15.000 integration in networks of influence through which ideas and social forms are diffused. 00:08:16.200 --> 00:08:21.132 Economic development may, of course, set limits on the capacity of a nation 00:08:21.156 --> 00:08:26.088 to institute systems available to be copied, and the propensities to copy 00:08:26.112 --> 00:08:30.841 may enable nations to install convergent patterns more rapidly than one 00:08:30.865 --> 00:08:36.000 would have predicted from knowledge of their level of economic development. 00:08:37.200 --> 00:08:40.000 This can be told differently in the following way: 00:08:41.200 --> 00:08:46.887 Societies at similar levels of economic development may converge because "imperatives" 00:08:46.911 --> 00:08:53.000 in their sociotechnical system cause them to respond to similar problems in similar ways. 00:08:54.200 --> 00:08:58.000 To explain this, the model ephasizes economic development. 00:08:59.500 --> 00:09:04.738 But societies may also converge because they borrow, so a model would have 00:09:04.762 --> 00:09:10.000 to explain how ideas and social forms diffuse through networks of influence. 00:09:11.000 --> 00:09:18.000 Of course, a society at a low level of development may be unable to copy features of some systems. 00:09:18.200 --> 00:09:25.000 But a society with a strong propensity to copy may do so more rapidly than predicted. 00:09:26.200 --> 00:09:32.000 The idea in the revised text is still complex, but it is now much easier to follow and understand. 00:09:32.200 --> 00:09:37.838 So, to sum up, thinking about whether your writing actually complicated things that are 00:09:37.862 --> 00:09:43.500 simple or already complicated enough, is a good practice to improve your writing skills. 00:09:43.800 --> 00:09:47.200 Final tip for good writing would be Revise, revise, revise. 00:09:48.000 --> 00:09:51.800 The filmmakers have a saying that the movie is made in the edit room. 00:09:52.000 --> 00:09:59.000 So, if you think that your writing is over when you put the final dot, be sure that it is certainly not the case. 00:09:59.200 --> 00:10:02.700 Now comes the editing part. So, check: 00:10:02.800 --> 00:10:08.044 If now, after all that you wrote, your introduction actually adequately announces 00:10:08.068 --> 00:10:14.000 the content of your piece; usually this is not the case, so the introduction needs to be revised. 00:10:14.100 --> 00:10:20.000 Second thing: Does your conclusion contain your key points or essence of everything that is written? 00:10:20.200 --> 00:10:26.000 And the third thong: Are your paragraphs well organised, that is, are all your arguments in order? 00:10:26.200 --> 00:10:31.120 If you organised your text well, every paragraph will have a central statement, 00:10:31.144 --> 00:10:36.000 so that, if you take them all out, they should contain your main arguments.